Where do the Members of SDF stand on the issue of the War in the Ukraine?


Where do you stand on the War in the Ukraine


  • Total voters
    135

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
Finland is not a threat to Russia. Finnish is an Uralic language. Russian is mainly Uralic. Moskva is an Uralic word. Finland only has a few million people and Finland is de facto a NATO country. They use F-18.
That is only TODAY, not after Finland formally joining NATO.

Finland as of today is not a threat to Russia even if it uses F-18. Finland after joining NATO will be a front line threat to Russia. Being official member of NATO obliges Finland to attack Russia if any conflict happens between Russia and another NATO member. Finland as of today does not have to do so even if it has close relationship with NATO.

Officially joining NATO does not necessarily prevent Russia attacking Finland if Russia felt a serious chance of conflict. Remember 1979 Sino-Vietnamese war, China invaded Vietnam after Vietnam signed a friendship and cooperation treaty with USSR in October 1978. At the time, the treaty's detailed texts were not published, so nobody knows if the treaty obliged USSR to militarily assist Vietnam in case of such war. China invaded Vietnam anyway. Why? 1. test the true nature of the treaty. 2. Call the USSR's bluff. This can happen to Finland too. Any ways, it was the Vietnamese paid the high cost. It is certainly Finland going to pay the cost if history repeats itself.

It is a extremely stupid move by the Finnish politician (and Swedish as well) to acquire more security by increasing the risk of loosing security. It is like gambling in a volatile stock market with one's whole pension saving.
 

gelgoog

Colonel
Registered Member
Finland decided on this course way back in 2008 at the very least. And you can bet a conflict between NATO and Russia will happen. Except this time I doubt Russia will let Finland escape with its own sovereignty and major population centers intact. They already let them out twice way back in Soviet times.
 

emblem21

Senior Member
Registered Member
Don't think those tsars treated their new territory very well. Once they got their independence, all wanted it to stay independent. No one wants to be exploited.

If you think about it, Russia is the only European country that kept their imperial spoils during the age of colonization (Siberia and far east). It just happens their expansions are into fairly empty territories in the far north where there is low population and is physically attached to Russia proper (European part). The English, French, Spanish and Portuguese all lost their colonies because they are across oceans.
The silly part is these places assume that by defeating Russia in Ukraine is somehow going to make the Russian pay for all the damages but as everyone knows, there is no chance this will happen. At the end, if these leaders end up destroying their own nations by increasing inflation and shortages to life destroying levels, I highly doubt that anyone in Europe is going to be happy with the current leaders any longer. These leaders in Europe, especially Ursula, stotenburg and Olaf Sholz are on borrowed time and the silly part is that Putin didn’t need to lift a finger to do most of the damage.
 

gelgoog

Colonel
Registered Member
I am still waiting for the list of sanctioned entities which the Russian government is supposed to present to Putin next Friday.
Thus far Russia hasn't made much in the way of sanctions, unless you consider the gas for rubles a sanction, well I don't.

The thing which was closest to sanctions was Russia stopping exports of certain food products until late this year.
But they did it because speculators were basically buying up all the food in Russia to resell at huge profit.

More of a defensive move than a sanction. Same as the gas for rubles. The actual sanctioned entities which might be announced starting next Friday, well, that might be more interesting.
 

Top